From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why can't objects be static in Ada?
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:15:11 -0500
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <q95nlv$slv$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <b411a770-5e86-4d5e-9e43-e52843be724d@googlegroups.com>
 <bc07b54c-0e86-4a40-931c-ca52d0295564@googlegroups.com>
 <q93bqr$qj3$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <eea7b282-3a5a-4274-adbf-81f8f6741e67@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 23:15:11 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="29375"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:56146
Date: 2019-04-16T18:15:11-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Lucretia" <laguest9000@googlemail.com> wrote in message 
news:eea7b282-3a5a-4274-adbf-81f8f6741e67@googlegroups.com...
> On Tuesday, 16 April 2019 02:40:45 UTC+1, Randy Brukardt  wrote:
>
>> I view this as self-inflicted, because there's no little value to pragma
>> Preelaborate. As I previously noted, compilers will almost always 
>> generate
>
> Nope, I didn't implement it, someone else did.
>
>> the best possible elaboration code whether or not that pragma is applied.
>> And regardless of C.4, not all preelaborated code can be done before load
>> time, so it isn't providing a benefit in forcing that sort of code, 
>> either.
>>
>> It's one of the ideas where Ada tried to accomplish something, but didn't
>> quite succeed. Pure is like that as well, but at least it provides some
>> benefits for Annex E code. Preelaborate doesn't even do that.
>
> If it didn't succeed, why is it still part of the language? This is the 
> typical attitude
>of the ARG refusing to deprecate old stuff.

Mostly, I think, because most of us don't care about it enough to go through 
the fight of making it Obsolescent. And that doesn't do anything for 
implementers, it just hides the feature in the back of the Standard.

We'd need a full redesign of Ada in order to get rid of this stuff, but I 
doubt there is sufficient interest (and I doubt the result would be 
something I'd like, anyway).

                                        Randy.